"The paper expanded during the first several years of his ownership, but the company has sputtered more recently. Matt Murray, The Post’s executive editor, said on a call Wednesday morning with newsroom employees that the company had lost too much money for too long and had not been meeting readers’ needs. He said that all sections would be affected in some way, and that the result would be a publication focused even more on national news and politics, as well as business and health, and far less on other areas."
What's it to Bezos? Why doesn't he just bankroll the operation? Make it so good it's worthy of spending money on?
A famous question: "Now, tell me honestly, my boy, don't you think it's rather unwise to continue this philanthropic enterprise, this
Inquirer that's costing you a million dollar a year?" Famously answered:
-- Why doesn't he just bankroll the operation? Make it so good it's worthy of spending money on?-- Because it is already 10 times the cost of Charmin toilet paper.
This is simply a way to make employees want to leave WaPo in a time where journalists can look forward to increasing obscurity. Bezos would be well advised to replace as much as he can with AI and junk the rest. If he had to, merely the WaPo subscriber database, past and present, would be very valuable to the right people.
Bezos is finding that owning a newspaper business isn't nearly as good a social media presence in the world as owning X, which apparently is back to being a profitable venture for Musk.
First rule of business: Maybe Bezos is simply clearing the Post of all those who caused the decline in the first place?
What struck me most watching that clip, however, was how much Orson Wells' facial expressions reminded my of Leo DiCaprio's acting style. For example, his smile when he delivers the line, "I'll have to close this place in 60 years."
Famously answered, but with a famous outcome: Xanadu, Rosebud, and a snow globe falling from Kane's bed. I certainly hope that Lauren Sánchez sings well.
Eighteen Pulitzer prizes since 2013, including: 1. Coverage of Jan 6, 2021 insurrection 2. Investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election (!) 3. 2016 coverage of police shootings 4. 2017 David Fahrenthold's coverage of Donald Trump's charitable giving
That progressive clickbait must be a real gold mine.
After the massive failure that was the Covington March for Life incident, and the WaPo's failure to publicly admit any wrongdoing, I can't get worked up over the collapse of the institution. That's one of many failures, but going after a random teenage male will never not stick in my craw.
Orson Welles' last role was the planet eating elder god Unicron in the 1986 animated classic Transformers: The Movie. Ironically, despite him hating the part, the film is a cult classic and is fondly remembered for Welles' absolute banger delivery of a massive eldritch horror robot.
He tried, or at least started down that path, and rapidly figured out that almost nobody is willing to work as an actual reporter versus a jurn-o-lister.
Scott Adams theorized that Bezos was arm twisted into turning WaPo into an Intel agency front in exchange for protection of his other businesses. WaPo led the charge in canceling Adams.
Welles was a great filmmaker. The shootout in the hall of mirrors in "The Lady From Shanghai" is incredible, as is the continuous tracking shot that opens "Touch of Evil." And Kane is stupendous from start to finish.
Anyone who has followed WaPo knows it's been in hospice for many months now . Free press is not compatible with Bezos business priorities and interests.
As is true with all deaths, it has been ugly full of denials and pretense.
Turns out democracy doesn't die in darkness. It drowns in corruption, ignorance, and lies.
“If the WaPo really leans in hard to anti-woke takes then maybe they could get a valuation as big as $150 million from a billionaire looking to curry favor with the administration.” ~Tim Miller
WaPo, like the times and most newspapers, decided decades ago that ideology was more important than truth. Reality is that if Harris were now President, Bezos would be adding more people, especially left wing hacks. Bezos and other billionaires don't care who is in the White House, they care about being the ruling elites, and treating the rest of us as wage slaves. they understand that money and power can buy them Congress, and anyone they want. If journalists like Salena Zito were the majority, none of this would be happening.
Is it possible that the cuts are a sign that Bezos has actually started to figure out how to build and maintain a profitable publication on the internet? First you have to cut out the slack?
The WaPo coverage of international and national affairs cant be distinguished from the NYT's or the other liberal/left papers. And why would anyone read the WaPO for sports, when they can go to ESPNs website?
The WaPo never investigates Democrat Presidents. And after its Russia gate coverage and non-stop attacks on Trump since August 2015, it has zero credibility as a non-partisan news source.
I don't know why he bought it, and I don't know why he cares that it's losing money. But I'm not going to look this particular gift horse in the mouth. Three hundred of the evil little fuckers! Chances are, most of them will never have another job. Who's going to hire them? NYT? Harvard? Some NGO?
"The cuts are a sign that Jeff Bezos, who became one of the world’s richest people by selling things on the internet, has not yet figured out how to build and maintain a profitable publication on the internet."
Now that's a stupid writer.
It's not Bezos' job to figure out how teh WaPo makes money, it's the people working for the WaPo.
That the vast majority of the people working at the WaPo couldn't care less about producing a paper that can attract a large enough audience to even break even is why so many of them are being fired.
Yeah, it’s not Bezos’s fault, newspapers are a dying business. I think he bought for a pretty low price. Apparently not enough of them made good on their threats to quit after the paper refused to endorse Kamala.
If Bezos could get the WP to be the kind of paper he could be proud of, I bet he'd be happy to lose money on it from now till kingdom come. To make that happen, he either needs to personally run the thing, or hire somebody he respects to do the job.
What's it to Bezos? Why doesn't he just bankroll the operation? Make it so good it's worthy of spending money on?
I think laying off a huge chunk of their work force may be a necessary, if not sufficient, condition of making it good enough. When one of your problems is a bad institutional culture among the staff, it's often not sufficient just to switch out leadership (the usual paper solution). You have to break that staff culture first before new leadership can fix things. Sometimes it works; often it doesn't.
In DC, I think the transit authority WMATA has suffered from a similar culture issue, where staff would bully and retaliate against each other for doing honest safety inspections (among other things), and switching out leadership every couple of years accomplished nothing until finally the upteenths new leadership team just disciplined like half of the entire safety department (with a bunch of terminations) back in 2016, after which WMATA seems to be improving slowly.
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
Posts
54 comments:
-- Why doesn't he just bankroll the operation? Make it so good it's worthy of spending money on?--
Because it is already 10 times the cost of Charmin toilet paper.
This is simply a way to make employees want to leave WaPo in a time where journalists can look forward to increasing obscurity. Bezos would be well advised to replace as much as he can with AI and junk the rest. If he had to, merely the WaPo subscriber database, past and present, would be very valuable to the right people.
Couldn't happen to a finer bunch...
’…has not yet figured out how to build and maintain a profitable publication on the internet.’
Laying off thirty percent of the staff is a good start to the goal.
Bezos is finding that owning a newspaper business isn't nearly as good a social media presence in the world as owning X, which apparently is back to being a profitable venture for Musk.
First rule of business: Maybe Bezos is simply clearing the Post of all those who caused the decline in the first place?
What struck me most watching that clip, however, was how much Orson Wells' facial expressions reminded my of Leo DiCaprio's acting style. For example, his smile when he delivers the line, "I'll have to close this place in 60 years."
Democracy Dies in Layoffs. Or something like that.
Famously answered, but with a famous outcome: Xanadu, Rosebud, and a snow globe falling from Kane's bed. I certainly hope that Lauren Sánchez sings well.
I only knew Orson Welles from his enormous days. He was a handsome fellow! Really gotta watch that movie some day.
Therein lies the rub. Can you make it so good it’s worthy to spend money on? Doubtful with the current slate of employees.
Bezos was sucking up to the Democrats in D.C., but gave that up when he appeared on state at the Trump 47 inauguration.
Bill Gates funded Slate and MSNBC back in the 1990s when the Democrats were considering a Microsoft breakup per anti-trust laws.
Bloomberg owns Bloomberg media, and briefly tried to buy the Wall Street Journal.
Musk owns X...
He clearly admired hearsts early days but he become too far ofentified with the left
Those poor, poor journalists.
Well: let a thousand Substacks bloom.
And fight for the same shrinking sliver of actual paying audience.
At some point, it isn't that there are too many brands of dog food on the shelves, it's that all of those brands are making the exact same flavor.
The exact same flavor that many are giving away for free.
And that a lot of dogs simply don't like the taste of, anyway.
Blame the dogs, of course.
I am Laslo.
Like yglesia with his bore loudly substack
How did 300 journalists missed the rampant fraud in Minnesota again?
Eighteen Pulitzer prizes since 2013, including:
1. Coverage of Jan 6, 2021 insurrection
2. Investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election (!)
3. 2016 coverage of police shootings
4. 2017 David Fahrenthold's coverage of Donald Trump's charitable giving
That progressive clickbait must be a real gold mine.
After the massive failure that was the Covington March for Life incident, and the WaPo's failure to publicly admit any wrongdoing, I can't get worked up over the collapse of the institution. That's one of many failures, but going after a random teenage male will never not stick in my craw.
Stop lying on behalf of the corrupt democrat party. Start there.
Orson Welles' last role was the planet eating elder god Unicron in the 1986 animated classic Transformers: The Movie. Ironically, despite him hating the part, the film is a cult classic and is fondly remembered for Welles' absolute banger delivery of a massive eldritch horror robot.
Make it so good it's worthy of spending money on?
He tried, or at least started down that path, and rapidly figured out that almost nobody is willing to work as an actual reporter versus a jurn-o-lister.
’How did 300 journalists missed the rampant fraud in Minnesota again?’
I’m sure it’s easy when they’re all focused on something orange.
Scott Adams theorized that Bezos was arm twisted into turning WaPo into an Intel agency front in exchange for protection of his other businesses. WaPo led the charge in canceling Adams.
Then theres carlos slim heliu the daddy warbucks of the Times also liubimov the ex kgb oligarch that owns the independent
He was also the elusive robin masters on magnum
Welles was a great filmmaker. The shootout in the hall of mirrors in "The Lady From Shanghai" is incredible, as is the continuous tracking shot that opens "Touch of Evil." And Kane is stupendous from start to finish.
Anyone who has followed WaPo knows it's been in hospice for many months now . Free press is not compatible with Bezos business priorities and interests.
As is true with all deaths, it has been ugly full of denials and pretense.
Turns out democracy doesn't die in darkness. It drowns in corruption, ignorance, and lies.
“If the WaPo really leans in hard to anti-woke takes then maybe they could get a valuation as big as $150 million from a billionaire looking to curry favor with the administration.” ~Tim Miller
Can the 300 block the "Hot Gates" of Thermopylae?
Funny how omidyar (pay pal billuonaire) who owns the bulwark doesnt come up
WaPo, like the times and most newspapers, decided decades ago that ideology was more important than truth.
Reality is that if Harris were now President, Bezos would be adding more people, especially left wing hacks.
Bezos and other billionaires don't care who is in the White House, they care about being the ruling elites, and treating the rest of us as wage slaves.
they understand that money and power can buy them Congress, and anyone they want.
If journalists like Salena Zito were the majority, none of this would be happening.
Is it possible that the cuts are a sign that Bezos has actually started to figure out how to build and maintain a profitable publication on the internet?
First you have to cut out the slack?
Althouse was ahead of her time. Institutions giving way to individuals.
Failure is always decending on Elon. Yet it always lands on Bezos.
The WaPo coverage of international and national affairs cant be distinguished from the NYT's or the other liberal/left papers. And why would anyone read the WaPO for sports, when they can go to ESPNs website?
The WaPo never investigates Democrat Presidents. And after its Russia gate coverage and non-stop attacks on Trump since August 2015, it has zero credibility as a non-partisan news source.
I wonder whether the CIA will offer to make a contribution keep the current staffing in place.
WaPoo? WaPout.
The activists who pose as journalists at WAPO can always get a job at The National Enquirer!! They are really good at making up stories!!!
JournoLism is a poor player that struts and frets its hour...
I too wish some billionaire would give me money. Or, for that matter, that the government would give me someone else’s money.
Sadly, neither seems likely.
I don't know why he bought it, and I don't know why he cares that it's losing money. But I'm not going to look this particular gift horse in the mouth. Three hundred of the evil little fuckers! Chances are, most of them will never have another job. Who's going to hire them? NYT? Harvard? Some NGO?
By dropping 300 Bezos is saving his $77mm per year just in salary and fringes. Not even counting expenses, travel, and office overhead.
"The cuts are a sign that Jeff Bezos, who became one of the world’s richest people by selling things on the internet, has not yet figured out how to build and maintain a profitable publication on the internet."
Now that's a stupid writer.
It's not Bezos' job to figure out how teh WaPo makes money, it's the people working for the WaPo.
That the vast majority of the people working at the WaPo couldn't care less about producing a paper that can attract a large enough audience to even break even is why so many of them are being fired.
This is known as justice.
Unlike Kane, Bezos appears to have no ambition for public office.
A few hundred million a year is rounding-error money for Bezos.
So either this is about appeasing Trump — or there’s a more uncomfortable possibility:
Pulitzer asked, “Is this good for democracy?”
Bezos asks, “Does this business model still work?”
What is implicit in the fact that not enough people value the "truth" which the WP offers to trade $1 toward its profitability?
As clay and buck noticed these publications have become fanzines for the left
Yeah, it’s not Bezos’s fault, newspapers are a dying business. I think he bought for a pretty low price. Apparently not enough of them made good on their threats to quit after the paper refused to endorse Kamala.
If Bezos could get the WP to be the kind of paper he could be proud of, I bet he'd be happy to lose money on it from now till kingdom come. To make that happen, he either needs to personally run the thing, or hire somebody he respects to do the job.
Clearly Bezos, like Musk, has no clue
Maybe strangling the paper into what it has become was Jeff's plan from the start and his investments are beginning to bare fruit.
I'd say "learn to code," except Bezos is also laying off a ton of (American) programmers and engineers.
What's it to Bezos? Why doesn't he just bankroll the operation? Make it so good it's worthy of spending money on?
I think laying off a huge chunk of their work force may be a necessary, if not sufficient, condition of making it good enough. When one of your problems is a bad institutional culture among the staff, it's often not sufficient just to switch out leadership (the usual paper solution). You have to break that staff culture first before new leadership can fix things. Sometimes it works; often it doesn't.
In DC, I think the transit authority WMATA has suffered from a similar culture issue, where staff would bully and retaliate against each other for doing honest safety inspections (among other things), and switching out leadership every couple of years accomplished nothing until finally the upteenths new leadership team just disciplined like half of the entire safety department (with a bunch of terminations) back in 2016, after which WMATA seems to be improving slowly.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.